[ad_1]
When James Anderson was pensioned off because he won’t make it to Australia, some asked why England persevered with Chris Woakes. Woakes is a bowler of a similar style to Anderson, not as good (few are as good as Anderson) and with a desperately poor record away from home (he averages more than 50 overseas compared to 21.83 at home).
Stokes said he couldn’t explain without sounding “ageist”, yet there is some logic to selecting purely on age. At 35, Woakes is hardly a young man, though a full seven years younger than Anderson – seven years is well more than half of Woakes’ Test career.
As he proved in last year’s Ashes and again at Edgbaston, Woakes gives England batting depth at number eight they currently will not find elsewhere. Jamie Overton, Brydon Carse and Jofra Archer are possible future options, though there is no guarantee any of them will make it to Australia. Rehan Ahmed and Tom Hartley could have done it, but neither are better spinners than Shoaib Bashir.
Runs alone will not get Woakes on the plane and England will always pick their best attack, regardless of batting ability. Will Woakes prove he should be among the six or so seamers with a ticket down under? Short of cricket beforehand, he got better as the Windies series went on.
Even if the pace of Wood, Archer, Gus Atkinson and Josh Tongue will be what England really desire, they will still need to balance the attack, particularly with at least one day-night Test to plan for.
It is not absolutely out of the question that Woakes is worth a place in the squad. If he isn’t, a role as a home specialist is no bad thing, either.
Source link
